The Way of Love, 1-13

13:1 If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but I do not have love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. 13:2 And if I have prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith so that I can remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. 13:3 If I give away everything I own, and if I give over my body in order to boast, but do not have love, I receive no benefit.

‘Paul establishes the necessity of love in his opening paragraph (1 Cor 13:1-3 Paul then follows this (1 Cor 13:4-7) with a description of the character of love. Finally, Paul ends with the permanence of love and establishes agape love as a mark of true Christianity by asserting, “the greatest of these is love” (1 Cor 13:13). Immediately following (1 Cor 14:1), Paul literally challenges the Corinthians to “pursue love;” to put others’ needs before their own.’ (Fee)

Prior quotes a passage from Thomas Merton, which talks about the chaplain at his boarding-school. This man’s interpretation of this chapter was that ‘love’ is equivalent to ‘being a gentleman’. ‘One might go through this chapter of St. Paul and simply substitute the word “gentleman” for “charity” wherever it occurs.’ Merton comments:

‘The Apostles would have been rather surprised at the concept that Christ had been scourged and beaten by soldiers, cursed and crowned with thorns and subjected to unutterable contempt and finally nailed to the Cross and left to bleed to death in order that we might all become gentlemen.’

Prior emphasises that this chapter must be read in the context of the rest of the letter:

‘When applied to the local church, it becomes dynamite. It uncovers all the weaknesses, gaps, failures and sins in any Christian community. It is a particular challenge to any church which has seen outward success in its ministry. These words cut us down to size; they humble us, because we begin to see what really matters to God. They re-direct us as the body of Christ to our true calling. It is probably good for any congregation to assess its life together from time to time in the mirror of this chapter.’

Paul has already stated, in 1 Cor 8:1, that ‘love builds up.’ When spiritual gifts are exercised in love, the body of Christ is edified. When they are exercised in a competitive spirit, the body is not edified.

If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels – Heiser (Angels: What the Bible Really Says About God’s Heavenly Host) notes that in Jewish thought angels were sometimes considered to speak Hebrew, and sometimes to speak their own esoteric language.  Heiser himself favours the esoteric-language interpretation.  He notes that if 2 Cor 12:2-4 refers to angelic speech, then it cannot have been Hebrew, because Paul would have understood it.

But it may be better to regard this as a rhetorical flourish, rather than indicating anything definite about angelic communication: Suppose I could speak in every language in earth and heaven?’ – even such a gift would be as meaningless din.

So, those with the gift of tongues should not use it unlovingly:

‘Some Christians with the gift of tongues insensitively impose it on others in the congregation; with considerable self-indulgence rather than a deep desire to build up the church, such people override the feelings of those who are either unaccustomed or unsympathetic to this gift.’ (Prior)

Love – Prior points out that the Greek word, agape, was not in common use prior to the time of the NT.  It was taken into the New Testament because the love of God in Christ required a new word.  It is, to borrow Charles Wesley’s words, ‘love divine, all loves excelling’.

Morris says,

‘It is a love for the utterly unworthy, a love which proceeds from a God who is love. It is a love lavished on others without a thought of whether they are worthy to receive it or not. It proceeds rather frmo the nature of the lover, than from any merit in the beloved.’

A resounding gong – Corinth was famous for its “bronze”, and bronze vases were often used to amplify sound in the outdoor theatres. Along with the clanging cymbal, it would be used in the Greek mystery-cults at Corinth, as a way of invoking the gods, driving away demons, or rousing the worshippers. Both instruments were incapable of a melodious sound.

Therefore:

‘If I have no love, I am not just useless but a positive nuisance. (John Chrysostom)

Encomia.  ‘An encomium is a poem or essay written in praise of either an abstract quality or a generalized character type. Common motifs are an introduction to the subject of praise, the distinguished and ancient ancestry of that subject, a catalog or description of praiseworthy acts and qualities, the superior or indispensable nature of the subject, the rewards that accompany the things being praised, and a conclusion urging the reader to emulate the subject.

Biblical encomia that praise an abstract quality include poems in praise of wisdom in the book of Proverbs (3:13-20; 8), God’s law (Ps. 119), love, (1 Cor 13) and faith (Heb. 11). Encomia praising character types include Ps 1,15,112, and Psa 128 (the godly person) and Pr 31:10-31 (the virtuous wife). The Song of the Suffering Servant in Isaiah 53 is a parody of the genre, praising the suffering servant for unconventional reasons.’ (Origin of the Bible)

If I have prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith so that I can remove mountains – How many gifts are mentioned here?  It depends on where the commas are placed.

The NIV suggests two – ‘If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing.’

The NET suggests three – ‘If I have prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith so that I can remove mountains’

But 1 Cor 12:8–10 suggests that knowing mysteries and having knowledge are separate gifts.  Mounce, therefore, reads the present verse as indicating that there are four gifts:

‘And if I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and have all knowledge, and if I possess all faith so that I can remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing.’

If I have a faith that can move mountains – Then, as now, ‘moving mountains’ was a figure of speech for performing the impossible. Cf. Mt 17:20.

This points to miracle-working (cf. 1 Cor 12:9-10), and echose the words of Jesus in Mt 17:20; 21:21, and Mk 11:23.:

‘While this phrase obviously points to extraordinary miraculous power, there is a question whether it was understood literally by Jesus and the Apostles. This phrase clearly points to a nature miracle rather than a healing miracle (cf. 12:9-10). It is no coincidence, in my judgment, that Jesus himself never performs this particular miracle and that nature miracles of this sort are astonishingly rare in the lives of the Twelve, Paul, and the early Christian communities. These facts point to the hyperbolic character of this concept and phrase.’ (College Press)

I am nothing – Gifts without grace are worth nothing at all.  As Morris remarks:

‘The Corinthians clearly thought that the possessors of certain gifts were extremely important persons…Not only are they unimportant, they are actually nothing.’

It follows that a person may possess miraculous powers and yet be a stranger to grace:

‘It is here supposed that a person may be able to speak with all the wisdom and eloquence both of men and angels and yet be destitute of this principle of universal charity. And certain it is that all these miraculous powers are independent of gracious affections and have been more or less exercised by men who were altogether destitute of the grace of God.’ (Charles Simeon)

In the words of Jonathan Edwards:

‘Salvation is promised to those who have the graces of the Spirit, but not to those who have merely the extraordinary gifts. Many may have these last, and yet go to hell. Judas Iscariot had them, and is gone to hell. And Christ tells us, that many who have had them, will, at the last day, be bid to depart, as workers of iniquity, Mt 7:22-23. And therefore, when he promised his disciples these extraordinary gifts, he bade them rejoice, not because the devils were subject to them, but because their names were written in heaven; intimating that the one might be, and yet not the other, Lk 10:17. And this shews that the one is an infinitely greater blessing than the other, as it carries eternal life in it.’

Paul here

‘exposes the vanity of every form of self-sacrifice which stops short of surrendering the self to God.’ (Wilson)

If I give all I possess to the poor – What a grand, generous gesture! But without love, it profits me not one bit.

If I give over my body in order to boast – There is a textual issue here.  Is Paul talking about martyrdom or boasting?

Compare:

NIV (1984) – ‘If I…surrender my body to the flames.’

ESV – ‘If I deliver up my body to be burned.’

NIV (2011) – ‘If I…give over my body to hardship that I may boast’.

NRSV – ‘If I hand over my body so that I may boast.’

CSB – ‘If I give over my body in order to boast.’

Bill Mounce agrees with Metzger that the original καυχήσωμαι (“to boast”) was changed to καυθήσομαι (“to burn”) once martyrdom by burning became more frequent.

The NIV (2011) adds ‘to hardship’ from the context in order to avoid the somewhat meaningless terseness of the NRSV and CSB.

Mounce cites the following as helpfully filling out the meaning:

NLT – ‘If I gave everything I have to the poor and even sacrificed my body, I could boast about it; but if I didn’t love others, I would have gained nothing.’

13:4 Love is patient, love is kind, it is not envious. Love does not brag, it is not puffed up. 13:5 It is not rude, it is not self-serving, it is not easily angered or resentful. 13:6 It is not glad about injustice, but rejoices in the truth. 13:7 It bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.

All the verbs are in the present continuous tense.

‘We have not in this chapter a methodical dissertation on Christian love, but an exhibition of that grace as contrasted with extraordinary gifts which the Corinthians inordinately valued. Those traits of love are therefore adduced which stood opposed to the temper which they exhibited in the use of their gifts. They were impatient, discontented, envious, inflated, selfish, indecorous, unmindful of the feelings or interests of others., suspicious, resentful, censorious. The apostle personifies love, and places her before them and enumerates her graces, not in logical order, but as they occurred to him in contrast to the deformities of character which they exhibited.’ (Hodge)

‘It is important that Paul uses verbs in describing such love: a loving person will behave in a certain way; he will do, and not do, certain things because of the kind of person he is becoming, through the love of God shed abroad in his heart by the Holy Spirit. These qualities, these actions are top priorities for every Christian in a local church. If these are absent, the church will languish and fail, if not disintegrate, however active, successful and large it may be.’ (Prior)

‘It is not coincidental that these four verses perfectly describe the character of Jesus himself, and of nobody else. This becomes clear when we substitute “Jesus” for “love” in this passage, and then by contrast insert our own name instead.’ (Prior)

In the five negatives that follow, Paul is no doubt alluding to character-traits that were prevalent among the Corinthian Christians.’Time and time again the same sins rear their heads: people resent others’ success, blessings or gifts; dissatisfied with their own place and opportunities, they compete for more rom, honour or recognition. Jesus, by contrast, quietly pursued the work to which he had been called; he rejoiced in the growth and success of others, encouraging them onward with sensitive wisdom, but never putting anyone down or ignoring anyone. He never needed to over play his ministry or to blow his own trumpet. Exaggerated, let alone sensationalised, descriptions of the way God is using us betray a lack of confidence in our acceptance by God.’ (Prior)

‘In a few deft strokes Paul paints a picture of the person who is moved and filled with the love of God. In doing so he also throws into relief the self-centredness of much Corinthian – and modern – church life. Only the love of God, keeping us in a deep experience of his complete acceptance of us as we are, can enable us to face up to our self-centredness, to renounce it and to look for light to shine in our inner darkness. In the love of God there is no place for asserting our rights, despising our gifts, envying our brothers and sisters, or treating them insensitively and boorishly. Such love, in any case, turns us outwards to look to the needs and the interests of others: when we notice that our behaviour or attitudes are damaging or offending another person, love propels us to deal with such inner darkness through the grace of the Lord. There is no local church anywhere which does not need more love for this very basic purpose.’ (Prior)

Love…does not envy – ‘The word (’zeloo’) here used may express any wrong feeling excited in view of the good of others; not only envy, but hatred, emulation, and the like.’ (Hodge)

‘If we love our neighbour we shall be so far from envying his welfare, or being displeased with it, that we shall share in it and rejoice in it. His bliss and satisfaction will be an addition to ours, instead of impairing or lessening it…The prosperity of those to whom we wish well can never grieve us; and the mind which is bent on doing good to all can never wish ill to any.’ (M. Henry)

Love…is not proud – Pride was the Corinthian’s besetting sin, 1 Cor 4:6, 18, 19; 5:2; 8:1. But ‘love is concerned rather to give itself than to assert itself.’ (Morris)

It is not rude – The underlying word, aschemoneo, (from a, negative, and schema, a form) is also found in 1 Cor 7:36. ‘Love’s behaviour is not contrary to the ‘form, fashion, or manner that is proper.’ (Lenski)

It is not self-seeking – ‘Love not merely does not seek that which does not belong to it; it is prepared to give up for the sake of others even what iti is entitled to.’ (Barrett)

The next three negatives concern our attitude towards the weaknesses, sins and failures of others which may force us into lovelessness. (Prior)

Not easily angered – Are there some people who have a habit of rubbing me up the wrong way, of getting under my skin, of irritating me?

‘It is tempting to blame such people for their impact upon us, instead of facing honestly the reality of our own touchiness.’ (Prior) Think of how the disciples stretched Jesus’ patience, and yet ‘he loved them to the end’, Jn 13:1. ‘If we truly love someone with the love of the Lord, we shall see their strengths and their potential rather than their quirks and their foibals. When they do or something which angers us, we shall be able to treat them in the context of what they are in Christ, instead of magnifying what has happened so that it consumes our vision.’ (Prior)

It keeps no record of wrongs – It stores up no resentment, bears no malice. Every Christian needs a good ‘forgetory’! A Christian woman was speaking very kindly about another person. Someone said, “How can you speak about her like that? Don’t you remember the time she was so nasty to you?” “Oh, no,” replied the woman, “I distinctly remember forgetting that!”

When someone says, “I can forgive, but I can’t forget,” what they really mean is, “I can’t forgive.”

Love does not delight in evil – For to do so is a sign of deep depravity, Rom 1:32. A good example of ‘delighting in evil’ is found in the sin of gossiping. But love does not take pleasure in exposing evil in others, but on the contrary, love ‘covers a multitude of sins’. (1 Pet 4:8)

Love’s reassurance:

‘Especially when there is little to encourage faith, love strengthens us to trust in the dark, to penetrate through to the other side despite the mountains of doubt, knowing that our Father God is in control and will ultimately demonstrate his victory. More than that, love enables us to exercise a strong assurance that, however black it seems, God has not lost his way and has for us “a hope and a future.”’ (Jer 29:11) (Prior)

Always hopes – There thought ‘is not that of unreasoning optimism, which fails to take account of reality. It is rather a refusal to take failure as final.’ (Morris)

Taking verses 6 and 6 together we can agree with Stott that there is a difference between a tolerant mind (which rejoices in the truth but will oppose evil) and a tolerant spirit (which will always protect, trust, hope, and persevere).  For, ‘how can we be tolerant in mind of what God has plainly revealed to be wrong?’  (Christ the Controversialist, 17)

On the character of a person of love:

‘A charitable person seeks to construe all things to the best and hopes for the best where there is no clear reason to the contrary. Such people are more willing to suffer wrong than to seek revenge or do harm. They endure all things with a good conscience and seek only those things that they are confident will contribute to the glory of God or the advantage of the truth.’ (John Downame)

13:8 Love never ends. But if there are prophecies, they will be set aside; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be set aside. 13:9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part, 13:10 but when what is perfect comes, the partial will be set aside. 13:11 When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. But when I became an adult, I set aside childish ways. 13:12 For now we see in a mirror indirectly, but then we will see face to face. Now I know in part, but then I will know fully, just as I have been fully known. 13:13 And now these three remain: faith, hope, and love. But the greatest of these is love.

As Hays remarks,

‘this is the part of the chapter that most clearly shows that it was composed to deal with the specific problem of the evaluation of spiritual gifts in the Corinthian community. Love is mentioned only in the beginning and end of the unit (vv. 8a, 13); all the intervening material (vv. 8b–12) highlights the temporary status of spiritual gifts, especially tongues, prophecy, and knowledge (vv. 8b–9). Had Paul been writing a general “hymn to love,” he would hardly have emphasized this contrast so strongly.’

Love never ends – ‘never fails’ (NIV).

‘While the gifts of the Spirit are a means of grace, divine love is grace itself,’ (Wilson) and therefore remains when the means cease:

‘This love never folds under pressure of the most intense and sustained kind. This love continues through death into eternity. This is the love of God.’ (Prior)

Paul underlines the priority of love by mentioning the three gifts at the top of the Corinthians’ list of priorities – prophecy, tongues, and knowledge. ‘Each of these will either become irrelevant or else be swallowed up in the perfection of eternity v10. (Prior)

In The Lost Message of Paul (ch. 14), Steve Chalke appeals to this phrase to support his own version of universalism (although he eschews that name).  Paul’s words ‘are either true, or irresponsibly misleading. “Never” either means never, or it doesn’t.’  But this is to employ the sort of contextless proof-texting that Chalke himself affects to despise.  His point simply cannot be demonstrated from this text.  For one thing, Paul happens to be discussing human, rather than divine love.  For another thing, the apostle is contrasting the temporary nature of charismatic gifts with the permanence of love, not offering a comment on the eternal destiny of human beings.

Prophecies – ‘the setting forth of what God says to man through the prophet’ (Morris). But when we see God face to face there will be no need for this gift.

Cease – katargeo.

Stilled – paeo – meaning simply that tongues will stop.

Knowledge – Probably not ordinary human learning, but the ‘word of knowledge’, 12:8.

Pass away – katargeo.

‘With the writing of the New Testament, and its availability to believers, God’s revelation was closed. Three of the original gifts of the Spirit, namely the revelatory gifts of tongues, prophecy and charismatic knowledge, have now fulfilled their purpose. With the appearance of the New Testament they have, in accordance with 1 Cor 13:8, been removed from the list of early Christian charisms and have ceased to be.’ (Q in Grossmann, Stewards of God’s Grace, 14)

‘The important criterion in determining whether or not a particular spiritual gift will endure is its purpose. The purpose of a mercury vapor light is to illuminate the highway at night. When the sun rises, the highway becomes illuminated by a greater and more perfect light. The mercury vapor light then goes out because it has served its purpose. In a similar way, spiritual gifts-whether knowledge, prophecy, or tongues-will cease to function when a state of perfect spiritual maturity is attained. Their “light” will no longer be required then.’ (Illustrations for Biblical Preaching)

We prophesy in part – God does not reveal everything, so even an inspired prophet only gives a part of the whole truth, cf Deut 29:29.

When what is perfect comes – Refers,  not the completion of the biblical canon, nor to spiritual maturity of the individual or the church, but to the life to come.  See following note.

Disappears – katargeo, already used twice in v8.

Present knowledge is imperfect in degree, not quality:

‘Our present knowledge is imperfect because it is partial. This is an imperfection of degree rather than quality. What we know of God by revelation is indeed truly known, for it is infallibly communicated. But when this fragmentary disclosure at last gives place to the beatific vision of God in Christ, “then that which is in part shall be done away.”’ (Wilson)

So, what will happen to our knowledge? –

‘Our knowledge will not disappear, but its imperfections will be revealed. Everything we now know imperfectly will be transformed into perfect knowledge.’ (John Chrysostom)

Paul now illustrates the general truth of v10 with two illustrations: the contrast between childhood and maturity, and the contrast between seeing a poor reflection in a mirror and seeing face to face.

Put…behind me – katargeo.

Our present knowledge is not false; but it is incomplete:

‘Our views of divine things will hereafter be very different from those that we now have. But it does not follow that our present views are false. They are just, as far as they go; they are only inadequate.’ (Charles Hodge)

Now we see in a mirror indirectly – ‘dimly’ (ESV, NRSV, NASB), ‘indistinctly’ (HCSB), ‘darkly’ (KJV).

Ancient mirrors were made of metal, not glass, and the bronze mirrors of Corinth were famous.  But Paul’s point is not the poorness of the image through such a mirror (NIV has ‘a poor reflection as in a mirror’) but, as the NET translation puts it, the point is that the image in a mirror is seen indirectly.  The comparison, then, is not between distorted vision and seeing clearly, but between indirect and direct (seeing ‘face to face’) vision.

We shall see face to face – Again, the contrast is between direct and indirect knowledge:

‘He is thinking of the well-known contrast in his Greek Bible between ordinary prophets, who knew the Lord merely through visions and dreams (’ainigmata’), and Moses who was promised direct intercourse and a vision of the Lord “face to face, not in any ‘ainigma’”’ (Moffatt)

Cf. Num 12:6-8; 1 Jn 3:2.

Ciampa and Rosner thinks that Paul is alluding Num 12:8 and Deut 34:10 here, and is thus contrasting, as some ancient Jewish writers did, Moses’ experience of God (‘face to face’) with that of the other prophets (who received revelation through dreams and visions).

For Thiselton this ‘seeing face to face’ is precisely what is meant by the ‘beatific vision’.  And this will come

‘at the end time, when mutual love will need no sacrament or church or Bible, no knowledge by inference, but the vision of God face to face.’

I shall know fully, even as I am fully known – God’s knowledge of us is immediate and complete.

This verse does not, however, teach that we will one day be omniscient:

‘1 Cor. 13:12 does not say that we will be omniscient or know everything (Paul could have said we will know all things, ta panta, if he had wished to do so) but, rightly translated, simply says that we will know in a fuller or more intensive way, “even as we have been known,” that is, without any error or misconceptions in our knowledge.’

(Grudem, Systematic Theology, 2nd ed., in a footnote to p1428.  Grudem says that this opens up the prospect of wide-ranging and delightful enquiry in the new creation.)

These three remain – Paul places these graces above the most spectacular of gifts:

‘If the Corinthians majored on tongues, prophecy and knowledge, Paul focuses attention on faith, hope and love. These three qualities are the ones which “abide”.’ (Prior)

In what sense do these remain?

‘In one sense faith and hope shall be done away, faith being superseded by sight, and hope by actual fruition; (Rom 8:24; 2 Cor 5:7) and charity, or love, alone never faileth. (1 Cor 13:8) But in another sense, “faith and hope,” as well as “charity,” ABIDE; namely, after the extraordinary gifts have ceased; for those three are necessary and sufficient for salvation at all times, whereas the extraordinary gifts are not at all so; compare the use of “abide,” 1 Cor 3:14.’ (JFB)

The greatest of these is love – Love is enjoined in the greatest commandment, Mk 12:30f; it is the fulfilling of the law, Rom 13:10; it is pre-eminent above tongues, 1 Cor 13:1; prophecy, knowledge and faith, 1 Cor 13:2, benevolence and martyrdom, 1 Cor 13:3; it is the greatest of all, 1 Cor 13:13.

Love is the greatest of these eternal virtues, because love is divine:

‘God does not believe nor hope, but he loves. Love belongs to his essence. Like God himself, it could not change its nature except for the worse. Love is the end in relation to which the two other virtues are only means, and this relation remains even in the state of perfection.’ (Godet)